Donald Trump’s Social Security Proposal Is Popular

Former president and top Republican candidate Donald Trump previously called to end taxes on Social Security benefits, and it appears a majority of Americans are behind his proposed policy.
Roughly 64 percent of Americans said they supported getting rid of taxes on Social Security payments, according to a recent Wall Street Journal poll. Another 19 percent said they somewhat favored the policy, and only 10 percent outright opposed the idea.
“Given the rise in expenses for many seniors, as well as more Americans qualifying for benefits in the coming years, it’s no surprise more are saying they would like to see restrictions on taxation of these benefits,” Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek.
However, Trump’s proposal could also mean America’s national debt would grow, creating issues later.
When the Wall Street Journal poll asked if respondents would still support the policy if it increased America’s debt, support declined to 41 percent, with 26 percent somewhat in favor.
“The appeal is straightforward: keep more money in your pocket,” Kevin Thompson, a finance expert and the founder and CEO of 9i Capital Group, told Newsweek. “Most voters see only the immediate benefit, which is more disposable income. The surprising part is that there’s little focus on where the revenue to fill the Social Security fund would come from. No one seems to be asking that critical question.”
Currently, roughly 50 percent of Social Security beneficiaries have their payments taxed.
If your total income is above $25,000 for individuals, up to half of your benefits can be taxed. And if that income is beyond $34,000, up to 85 percent of benefits can be taxed.
Due to these tax rules, many seniors don’t return to work even if they want to. Or they’re forced to continue working longer because their Social Security benefits won’t be able to support them fully in retirement.
The Social Security Administration is also facing a funding crisis as analysts have predicted the agency will not have money to make full payments by as early as the mid-2030s.
“The overwhelming support for removing the tax on Social Security deserves further scrutiny,” Thompson said. “While many people are in favor of this, it’s important to realize that if such a policy were enacted, it would likely result in reduced benefits to offset the lost revenue. Essentially, it would be shifting the burden, potentially creating a more severe financial impact through other forms of taxation or budget cuts.”
If Trump’s tax cuts went through, it would likely benefit 16 percent of households across America, according to the Tax Policy Center. That would lead to an average increase of $3,400.
Republican Congress members Thomas Massie (Kentucky) and Lauren Boebert (Colorado) have pushed a similar proposal to Trump under HR 3206, the Senior Citizens Tax Elimination Act.
The bill “assists middle-class seniors by eliminating the unjust double tax on Social Security benefits,” Massie said on social media platform X.
But House Democrats have also been pushing a piece of legislation that would end federal taxes on Social Security, too.
If Representative Angie Craig (Minnesota)’s You Earned It, You Keep It Act goes through, taxes on Social Security would disappear in 2025 and the Social Security’s income tax cap would apply to earnings above $250,000 instead of its current lower cap of $168,600.
“This bill is a win-win—it’s a tax cut for seniors and a way to ensure more Americans can depend on the Social Security benefits they’ve earned,” Craig said in a statement.
There are still concerns when it comes to the proposals on the line, though.
Because an increasing number of Americans would qualify for the reduced taxes on their Social Security benefits, a larger source of revenue would be missing for the federal government, Beene said.
“As popular an idea as no taxation on Social Security benefits is, it seems like this is more a proposal meant to lure voters for potential candidates than it is something that could actually get votes to be changed legislatively in the future,” Beene said.